Epic

[lmz0330]

Has anyone worked on the EPIC EHR system. Wondering How it is different from other EHR.
I know employers specifically ask for experience on Epic system. Is it that difficult to learn?

Thank You,

lmz

 

[ncurtis]

Has anyone worked on the EPIC EHR system. Wondering How it is different from other EHR.
I know employers specifically ask for experience on Epic system. Is it that difficult to learn?

Thank You,

lmz

I've been through an EPIC implementation and I can tell you it was a huge under taking but so worth it. I personally love working out of the EPIC EHR system and It would be very difficult for me to ever work at a facility that doesn't currently use it. The lay out of EPIC is different from other systems that I've used like Allscripts. Everything seems to flow rather easy from looking at the charges to reviewing chart notes, lab and x-ray's. It just makes sense. From checking in a patient all the way through the Revenue Cycle process, it flows rather nice.

 

[nomerz]

I would agree with the previous post. It's a lot different that previous systems I've worked on (mainly Meditech and Allscripts) and there's A LOT of clicking to get where you need to go, but once you get the hang of it I think it really is meant to be streamlined and user-friendly. I still have days where I hate Epic but they're becoming less and less and I've been on it for almost a year.

 

[camillecoder@hotmail.com]

Epic Fail

I have four pages of itemized problems with Epic that I plan to submit to Judith Faulkner when I retire. I've been involved in two separate Epic implementations over 15 years and it has not improved. I now work for an employer where we have "Care Everywhere" that allows us limited access to other local healthcare Epic systems. Sounds great, right? And it's been a goal of Meaningful Use to have interoperability. But the other system's Epic is so completely different from ours you would think it's a different program. No one is ever a master in Epic because so there are so many layers of useless, irrelevant information and we get only the most basic "training" every time there's an "upgrade". Epic designs products for specialties but the product is so expensive that most physician groups and hospitals purchase only the basic service so we spend a lot of time in workarounds trying to get Epic to do what we need it to do. Trying to validate data for PQRS demonstrated how ineffective, cumbersome, and illogical it is to navigate and make Epic a useful EHR and practice management system.

Epic experience is valuable to employers because it takes so much time and energy to get someone trained.

Whether many of these problems are really Epic's issue or the administrators' issue is anyone's guess. I still hold Epic accountable because if it was an intuitive and logical system it wouldn't matter how poorly we are trained.

Epic is like driving from Portland to Seattle on side roads. You can get there but it takes a long time and many stops at red lights and some wrong turns. eClinicalWorks is like using the freeway.

 

[mitchellde]

As a contract coder I work with many different clinics and facilities. Epic is NOT the same everywhere you go. Asking if you have Epic experience is always funny to me because it does not mean you can jump in and use their version. I wonder how many different versions there are in play? I have use 5 completely different versions of Epic. Knowing Epic is to not know Epic. I find the many different keystrokes so frustrating and some versions are much worse than others. Just an Epic failure!

 

[spirving]

I have four pages of itemized problems with Epic that I plan to submit to Judith Faulkner when I retire. I've been involved in two separate Epic implementations over 15 years and it has not improved. I now work for an employer where we have "Care Everywhere" that allows us limited access to other local healthcare Epic systems. Sounds great, right? And it's been a goal of Meaningful Use to have interoperability. But the other system's Epic is so completely different from ours you would think it's a different program. No one is ever a master in Epic because so there are so many layers of useless, irrelevant information and we get only the most basic "training" every time there's an "upgrade". Epic designs products for specialties but the product is so expensive that most physician groups and hospitals purchase only the basic service so we spend a lot of time in workarounds trying to get Epic to do what we need it to do. Trying to validate data for PQRS demonstrated how ineffective, cumbersome, and illogical it is to navigate and make Epic a useful EHR and practice management system.

Epic experience is valuable to employers because it takes so much time and energy to get someone trained.

Whether many of these problems are really Epic's issue or the administrators' issue is anyone's guess. I still hold Epic accountable because if it was an intuitive and logical system it wouldn't matter how poorly we are trained.

Epic is like driving from Portland to Seattle on side roads. You can get there but it takes a long time and many stops at red lights and some wrong turns. eClinicalWorks is like using the freeway.

I agree with this. Admittedly I've only used one version but I worked closely with the group who worked set up and maintenance. It was a nightmare to get things fixed and forget about upgrades. As stated it was so expensive our company was 2 yrs behind the most recent version because we couldn't afford to keep up. The medical records was awful in my opinion. There wasn't a good flow. Now maybe this was our set up or maybe it was the system, not sure. I just know I cringe when I see EPIC mentioned now.